Nietzsche once wrote that all profound things wear masks, but this Halloween, and others before it, will witness the merely mundane trying not to culturally offend anyone with their choice of costume. Since the exhausting expelling of literal interpretations of monsters from the human mind, the symbolic, functional, and allegorical aspects of such creatures compel interpretation.

No sooner had the trailer for Rockstar’s hotly anticipated sequel to Red Dead Redemption hit the web than the SJWs were gnashing their teeth over its lack of strong womyn. “… [I]f RDR 2 continues without any sort of major kick-ass woman, it’ll be actually far more male-focused as a story than most classic westerns” wrote Dan Golding at Kotaku. Over at The Mary Sue, Jessica Lachenal linked to various articles about lady outlaws. According to her, the game is bucking tradition if it doesn’t pay homage to these obscure figures. But since we know so little about the game, this judgment is a bit premature.

If the judgement is accurate, what are its merits? In other words, why does it matter whether the game has “kick-ass” women or not? Golding’s article doesn’t explain what these characters add to Westerns; he just says there is a tradition of kick-ass women in Western films, which the game borrows from. Couldn’t a Western have “kick-ass” women and be awful, despite (or because of) the presence of these characters?

Those who believe in Providence will attest that
it is a wondrous thing. Often it sees to it that our faults, shortcomings, and
vices wind up serving the greater good, quite contrary to our intentions and
expectations.

In such a manner, I believe, Providence might
presently be working through Donald J. Trump, to all appearances a vain,
egotistical, arrogant, imprudent, and irascible blowhard whose very character
deficiencies are currently enabling him to take a heroic stand against
unfathomable corruption and unspeakable evil, in a context in which men of a
less problematic temperament might feel tempted to roll over, knuckle under,
and plead “no mas!”

Of course, we all know that that is unsustainable, and that African nations are completely unable to limit their excessive population growth in the same way that China, or even India, did in the late 20th century. We also know about the way in which excessive population growth is corrected. Hint: it doesn't taper off gently. Instead what you get is total system collapse on a massive scale. (Refer to the example of reindeer on St. Matthew Island, Alaska, for the likely effect this has on population.

Colin Liddell and Tim Kelly discuss William F. Buckley, the National Review, and the Conservative Movement. This was an interesting synthesis of Leftist and Rightist tendencies called into being by the expediencies of the Cold War, but was unable to oppose the rise of political correctness or prevent the dangerous hollowing out of the American Empire that we see today.

This article was originally posted in February 2014; it is republished here in light of the recent alarming ramp-up of tensions between the United States and Russia (with a Western media largely complicit in a poisonous revamped Russophobia), and the possibility of a proxy war, or worse, breaking out in Syria should Hillary Clinton become president.

Kenneth Branagh’s Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit is not a great or even a good movie, but the fact of its very dubious celluloid existence attests to a very real social phenomenon: the attempted ginning up, by certain powerful and influential American lobby groups, of a new Cold War with Russia.

Coming on the wings of a campaign rebound, Donald Trump gave the media the detail that it wanted months ago, but now has very little room to attack.

Speaking at a historical American battleground and symbol of the Civil War that formalized the division between liberal cosmopolitan cities and practical, realistic heartlands, Trump tackled present-day divisions in the nation. He mentioned being inspired by Lincoln, the president who (in theory) held the nation together.

In recent years the "American Empire" has been losing ground badly. Not only has Putin outmanoeuvred it in the Middle East, but now the Chinese have gained a major geopolitical victory by persuading the Philippines to break ranks, effectively opening a door in the archipelago of islands in Asia that served as a "sea wall" containing China's rising power. In our latest YouTube video, Colin Liddell, Chief Editor of Alternative Right, addresses this issue and comes to the conclusion that realpolitik and mutual economic benefit is a better foundation for geopolitical power than social justice posturing and pandering to the interests of an ethnic donor class.

Back in 2012 Alternative Right Assistant Editor Andy Nowicki visited South Africa and made a pilgrimage of sorts to the Voortrekker Monument, the spiritual center of the Boer Nation. Here he walks along the outside of the Monument and recalls some crucial aspects of Afrikaner history whilst taking in the massive and intimidating stone structure, built in 1948 to commemorate the Boers' miraculous victory over the Zulus at Blood River, a battle in which they were vastly outnumbered yet managed to vanquish the enemy without losing a single man.

Also watch the video of Andy inside the Voortrekker Monument here, and read his articles about South Africa here and here.

Just one night after the third presidential debate, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton attended the Alfred E. Smith charity dinner, a major event on the social calendar for rich Catholics and other members of New York's elite. Trump gave a speech 'roasting' his presidential rival, which started light-heartedly but became a little darker as it proceeded, even drawing a few boos from Hillary supporters. Despite this, there was no mistaking the convivial "elite intersectionality" of these members of the ruling class, who seem to have few problems rubbing shoulders and laughing at each other's jokes, regardless of their angry denouncements of each other elsewhere.

In his recent speech in Florida, Donald Trump just called out the globalist elite, order, and agenda, so what better time to address the theme of this essay, “Switching Sides.”

My previous piece on Donald Trump "GET Trump" proved spot on. The accusations of mainstream anti-Trump media bias have only increased ten-fold since I wrote the article. So, I thought I’d address some of the core issues head on. As the Globalist Elite is nefariously mercurial as a topic, the essay may venture into metaphor and metaphysics, speculation and conspiracy theory, and suggest some radical solutions and Gordian-Knot-cutting-style solutions.

While obviously targeted at the Alt Right Audience, it is also aimed, with all due respect, at our Globalist Overlords, who could perhaps take a few tips from the Alt Right about possible ways forward.

It was supposed to be a done deal, and ten years ago it would have been, but the rise of the alternative media and heroes like Julian Assange and James O'Keefe have scuppered the establishment's plans to hand the Presidency to Hillary Clinton in return for the usual ragbag of favours and exemption from threats. Here Styxhexenhammer666, a popular vlogger on the fringes of the Alt-Right, gives an insightful analysis of a Clinton campaign slowly bleeding to death.

On the anniversary of 9/11, President Obama called for the US to embrace diversity.

The reason multiculturalism makes my blood boil is, whilst I am a libertarian, I am also strongly nationalistic. Many libertarians confuse nationalism with collectivism, statism, and racism; the implication being, if you’re an alt-righter and share nationalistic sentiments, you’re no libertarian. They assume we are delusionally taking personal pride in the historical achievements of long-dead, successful European people. That is, we forget our individualistic selves and imagine a racial collective which can take credit for the achievements of others who share certain genes. But, that’s not why I’m nationalistic at all.

Star Trek has always been a vehicle of the do-gooders, even before the term was known, but the themes of peace, respect, and friendship of the peoples, which have been running through its universe like a red thread, have resonated well with the audience in the time of the superpower conflict and Mutually Assured Destruction (fittingly abbreviated to MAD). After the cold war, cultural Marxism and political correctness fully took over the Enterprise, but the series still holds some value for those viewers who have been more intrigued by the looks of the latest starships, photon cannons, and intergalactic beauties.

Wait, did I just say that? Am I sexually attracted to female aliens? Yes, I am.

In that piece, composed just days prior to the W. vs. Kerry throw-down of ’04, I noted the “elementary error in logic in the very notion of trusting the majority,” which is after all the principle upon which democracy is predicated. But, I added, the dimensions of my vitriol wasn’t limited to a mere quibble over an unsound calculation:

Over the past few weeks, The Wall Street Journal has been hedging its bets—and distinguishing itself from its competition—by running more neutral perspectives in its stories on the election. As of today, however, the battle lines have been drawn as the Journal shines a spotlight on the corruption of Candidate Clinton:

Music died around 1993. I was there at the funeral, on the staff of Riff Raff, a failing rock magazine that realised too late that, post-1993, the music biz would mainly be about recycling pieces of the corpse of the Great Tri-Decade (1963-93), when music was actually alive and capable of growth as a multi-dimensional form of cultural expression.

I must have had an intuition, as the column I was writing at the time was a troll-like humour page by the name of “The Fly Column.”

At the moment, with all eyes focused on the electoral dogfight between Trump and Hillary, less thought is being given to the likely outcomes of each candidate's victories. Affirmative Right Chief Editor Colin Liddell considers how each scenario could play out, and which candidate would move things most in the direction of the Dissident Right and the more fundamental changes we believe in.

As America's elites have become increasingly detached from the core of the country, the oligopoly that has been running the state since the beginning has become increasingly reliant on "gaslighting" the public by mass media saturation and distortion.

But the stubbornness of the Trump campaign is proving dangerous to the established order because it is forcing them to show their hand and reveal their methods to an increasing number of people, who have been economically, emotionally, and now racially primed to see the manipulation that is under way.

Watching presidential debates has become surreal. It is somewhat disturbing that everyone seems to speak slowly and with difficulty, as if they were having mental confusion problems, with the exception of Donald Trump and Anderson Cooper.

More disturbing is the seeming anticipation and gratitude that people display for being told lies. They seem to hunger for them, thirst for them. Then again, lies are always easier to digest than truth. The dark side of democracy has never been so clear. The members of the public chosen for the townhall style question-and-answer seemed either cynical to one or both candidates, or clueless with glowing faces, wanting to hear what Uncle Santa was going to bring them.

Richard Wolstencroft and Ann Sterzinger join Colin Liddell to discuss the Second Presidential Debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Among the points raised are "pussygate," Trump's tendency to shaft the little guy, Bill Clinton's trail of "battered pussies," the heterosexuality of the Alt-Right, Wikileaks' prick teasing, Trump's tendency to drop Jewish names, the predictability of the October surprises, and why it's not a good idea to talk into a hot pussy.

Although there is no single explanation for the plight of the European peoples and the ongoing destruction of Western civilisation, we can perhaps distinguish between two different categories of explanations. With regards to the actions of our globalist, Cultural Marxist, Jewish, and corporate elites, so-called "left-wing explanations" are most appropriate: here we are correct in speaking of a hostile and exploitative ruling class, busily engaged in running down the West for its own benefit. (Indeed, as Sean Gabb argues in Cultural Revolution, Culture War, the various Marxist and Marxist-derived critiques of Western society should be read backwards as "manifestos" of the oppressive, unprincipled and self-interested regimes that are invariably set up by the students of these critiques.)

However, underpinning the rule of this hostile elite - and preceding it in time - is a more longstanding and natively developed self-destructive mentality in Western white people (particularly the middle classes), which cannot reasonably be blamed on anyone other than those white people themselves. This mentality consists of a toxic pacifism and idealism which, even when distinct from pacifism as a political dogma, is generally obsessed with keeping the peace at all costs and furthering the delusional vision of a world in which strife between peoples has become a thing of the past. With regards to this phenomenon, it is "right-wing explanations" such as decadence, cultural effeteness and racial suicide that seem to ring true.

For the political Left, there is no value that is more important than “universal human equality.” To be against equality is to be reactionary, regressive, benighted, bigoted, unenlightened, unseemly, and anti-human. And while previous generations of leftists were concerned primarily with legal equality, and then economic equality, today’s leftists demand equality in every sphere of human activity. Every profession must have an exact proportion of males and females (“gender parity”). Every institution must have an equitable proportion of ethnic groups. Any statistical disparity among races, genders, ages, sexual orientations, or classes is thought to be the result of mere oppression, exploitation or greed on the part of those who seem to have a leg up in life. Hence, the popularity of “privilege theory” among fashionable social justice warriors who equate the fact of having been born straight, white, male, “cisgendered” or some combination of these to be the equivalent of original sin.

Every now and then, you might run into a real person, even now. Unlike the usual people, real people have not entirely externalized their minds to money, social opinion and power.

For such people, power is found within. They have the ability to do things, or to find out or discover how. They derive their self-esteem from moral and personality traits. They know what they like, and can sit alone in a silent room thinking for hours.

Among
the few successes the “conservative movement” can reasonably claim is having
established the descriptive epithet of “big government” as a term of opprobrium
in American political discourse. Indeed, a review of the literature, websites,
and broadcast media associated with American conservatism reveals “big
government” to be an ongoing and consistent target of rhetorical invective. For
example, an August 15, 2014 piece of commentary appearing on the Townhall.Com
website bears the title, “Dismantling Big Government One Step at a Time.”[1] Two
days earlier, a post with the curious title of “How to Transcend Obamacare”
appeared on National Review Online, and discussed the widely held conservative
view that Obamacare “represents our best opportunity to roll back Big
Government” largely because of the “less entrenched” nature of this “newest
entitlement.”[2]
Even the most casual conversation with rank and file conservative movement
activists, dutiful Republican voters, fans of “conservative” talk radio, and
loyal viewers of the FOX news network will reveal a mentality that regards “big
government” as a primordial evil approximating that of original sin. It is
therefore fascinating to compare the striking difference between the movement’s
rhetoric and stated ambitions, and the reality of what the conservative
movement has actually produced when it has had access to power in the political
realm.

The liberals and the far-left are getting themselves very excited about the eightieth anniversary of the so-called 'Battle of Cable Street', which happened on the 4th of October, 1936, on the streets of east London.

On the 9th of October, later this month, the Muslim mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, and the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, will both speak at a rally hosted by the London Jewish Forum, also attended by the chief rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, to commemorate the event.

The new Oliver Stone movie is here – and it’s good news for fans of his work and contemporary cinema. He’s back, top of his game – after about 20 years in a rough patch since his masterful Nixon. This is the best flick he has directed in decades. Less hyperbolic, more disciplined and nuanced. Overall very impressive. The subject matter, also. Edward Snowden and the vast surveillance program of the NSA, CIA, and others agencies is the topic – perfect for Stone.

(Firstly, I’d like to send a big shout out to all our pals at the National Security Agency and Central Intelligence Agency – as you seem to be monitoring everything (I guess including this review) – I hope you enjoy it. Cheers!)

A discussion between Affirmative Right assistant editor Andy Nowicki and Todd Lewis of the "Praise of Folly" Youtube channel concerning the affinity of many on the Alt-Right for excessive statism. It would seem that such an approach amounts to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. One of the great achievements of Western civilization is the idea of the rights of the individual, the autonomy of civil society, and limitations on the power of rulers. This is an essential element of the Western heritage, and those who wish to reject it would seem to be disregarding a major Western political tradition in favor of Eastern despotism.

"Following Out magazine’s recent profile of Breitbart Senior Editor, Milo Yiannopoulos, leftists have trotted out one of their favorite buzzwords: 'white supremacist.'

Lucas Grindley of The Advocate, who can be seen in this piece’s header image, wrote an article reporting on an open letter signed by over forty LGBT reporters and media professionals condemning Out for their profile of Milo."